Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Myra Hawtree said:

Man of the Match for Scotland according to BBC web page report.

The official MOTM at the game was Andy Robertson but Gilmour was superb again second half. If we could get him playing like this for Norwich, it would be superb. 

We also badly missed Hanley. Glad he’s back for the next game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilmour should be part of the midfield 3 for me. I will be disappointed if Farke doesn’t manage to get him back into the side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scotland pressed higher up the pitch 2nd half and Gilmour was more involved. He always seems to play well for them and Clarke gets more out of him than Farke does, at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Now he needs to turn up for us

Well Farke needs to have the courage to get him back in the team for starters. We won't beat Brighton with ten men behind the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Yellow Wal said:

Israel are not Manchester City or Liverpool.

Incredibly valid point. Its not like Gilmour is unlucky to be out of the team, he's just not done enough so far.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hopefully now is the time for him to come back and get a run in the side in some more competitive games for us. Would love to see him and Normann established as the 2 in the middle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tetteys Jig said:

hopefully now is the time for him to come back and get a run in the side in some more competitive games for us. Would love to see him and Normann established as the 2 in the middle

I would love this to work, but I feel he will need a lot of game time to achieve a good enough standard in a 4231.

We must remember that he isn't really here to benefit us, just his parent club, who would like us to give him as much experience as possible to improve his game so that they do not have to. Make no mistake, if he does achieve that, Chelsea will get back as soon as possible in the same way they will the other twenty (approx.) players they have out on loan.

The present day loan system stinks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, yellowrider120 said:

Well Farke needs to have the courage to get him back in the team for starters. We won't beat Brighton with ten men behind the ball.

I agree with this. I will be a bit despondent if the same team takes to the field against Brighton as played at Burnley. We need a passer in there and ideally more pace alongside Pukki. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I agree with this. I will be a bit despondent if the same team takes to the field against Brighton as played at Burnley. We need a passer in there and ideally more pace alongside Pukki. 

If we're sticking with a 3-5-2, the creative player I'd like to see in the midfield would be Cantwell. He may not have the natural inclination to do the defensive phase, but many 'number tens' have played that role effectively before, and it would also give us the flexibility to turn that 3-5-2 into a 3-4-3 (3-4-2-1 or 3-4-1-2) as required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

If we're sticking with a 3-5-2, the creative player I'd like to see in the midfield would be Cantwell. He may not have the natural inclination to do the defensive phase, but many 'number tens' have played that role effectively before, and it would also give us the flexibility to turn that 3-5-2 into a 3-4-3 (3-4-2-1 or 3-4-1-2) as required.

Can't see Cantwell coming straight back in. Not Farkes way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

I agree with this. I will be a bit despondent if the same team takes to the field against Brighton as played at Burnley. We need a passer in there and ideally more pace alongside Pukki. 

I agree, but don't agree with 3-5-2......but it farke is gonna stick with that formation

Krul

Kabak, Hanley, omabomadele 

Aarons, Normann, Gilmore, McLean, gianoulis 

Cantwell, pukki

???? Just ideas that's all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Yellow Wal said:

I would love this to work, but I feel he will need a lot of game time to achieve a good enough standard in a 4231.

We must remember that he isn't really here to benefit us, just his parent club, who would like us to give him as much experience as possible to improve his game so that they do not have to. Make no mistake, if he does achieve that, Chelsea will get back as soon as possible in the same way they will the other twenty (approx.) players they have out on loan.

The present day loan system stinks.

of course he is here to benefit us or we wouldn't have taken him.

He's here because we think he will get in our best 11 if he puts his mind to it and performs, in the same way Skipp was last season. That clearly had huge benefits for us.

No reason Gilmour can't do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Tetteys Jig said:

of course he is here to benefit us or we wouldn't have taken him.

He's here because we think he will get in our best 11 if he puts his mind to it and performs, in the same way Skipp was last season. That clearly had huge benefits for us.

No reason Gilmour can't do the same.

Similarly, we loan out players to other clubs who we hope will benefit them. Our players gain experience and get closer to our first team, while putting in a valuable contribution to whoever they’re playing for. Or at least, that’s the desired outcome, obviously it doesn’t always work. But Maddison, Cantwell, Godfrey and so on all grew significantly while on loan, and did a job for their temporary club. I know it’s a cliche, but win-win surely?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

Similarly, we loan out players to other clubs who we hope will benefit them. Our players gain experience and get closer to our first team, while putting in a valuable contribution to whoever they’re playing for. Or at least, that’s the desired outcome, obviously it doesn’t always work. But Maddison, Cantwell, Godfrey and so on all grew significantly while on loan, and did a job for their temporary club. I know it’s a cliche, but win-win surely?

Yes, our players go on loan and we do quite well out of it. We are making the best out of a corrupt system but it pales into insignificance compared to the richest clubs milking the system to make themselves even richer.

 

 

Chelsea have at the moment approx 20 players out on loan. Do you think that is all about Chelsea helping out clubs in need or for their own benefit?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure about this. Probably costs us a bit, so there is a case for saying that the money could have been better used.

It seems that it might have been a move influenced by the success of Skipp last season; but that was for the Championship not the Premier League and Skipp had a more defined role in any case.

The kid is clearly class and is going places, so we must hope that, as the season unwinds,  he produces his Scotland form and a few points-winning moments in the yellow to justify the move. 

At the moment, Chelsea would seem to be the main beneficiary.

There does seem to be a contradiction here with us pumping money into the training ground and the academy in order to continue to benefit from, and boast about, our success with youth whilst becoming one of the twenty or so 'lesser' clubs furthering prospects from the Chelsea academy.

It makes more sense in the Championship, but perhaps we should seek to borrow more 'ready-made' and experienced performers from other PL clubs, for our quota, now that we are one of them. The same applies to Williams, I suppose.

I expect some could throw up notable exceptions.

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do any clubs loan their promising players to other clubs simply because it is a nice thing to do? Surely it is nearly always so they can benefit in some way, shape or form. I don't see how Chelsea doing it is more abhorrent than other clubs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chip20 said:

Do any clubs loan their promising players to other clubs simply because it is a nice thing to do? Surely it is nearly always so they can benefit in some way, shape or form. I don't see how Chelsea doing it is more abhorrent than other clubs. 

Ideally the three parties, the two clubs and the player, should gain benefit in equal proportions.

Let's hope that it works out that way with Billy Gilmore. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Yellow Wal said:

Israel are not Manchester City or Liverpool.

England reached euro finals, and Billy was instrumental in Scotland getting a draw out of that game - with most labelling him man of the match.

I think it's more telling of the team and system he plays in as to how effective he can be, rather than the level of opposition per se - he's already at least European stage level in the right mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with Mario before him, the lad needs some powerful players around him to shine rather than the lightweights Farke continues to turn out.

 

Not since Bradley Johnson was let go have we had any guts in the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, robert choice said:

As with Mario before him, the lad needs some powerful players around him to shine rather than the lightweights Farke continues to turn out.

 

Not since Bradley Johnson was let go have we had any guts in the team.

God knows how we won 2 championship titles without any guts.

Football blind.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilmour is a great player, but he needs the protection around him in order to shine. At the moment he's being asked to be far more defensive than he normally is for his country, or Chelsea. It might come good, but in the current system it's not allowing him to play to his strengths. Admittedly, aside of perhaps Watford and Leicester it's been against teams who have made us defend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AJ said:

Gilmour is a great player, but he needs the protection around him in order to shine. At the moment he's being asked to be far more defensive than he normally is for his country, or Chelsea. It might come good, but in the current system it's not allowing him to play to his strengths. Admittedly, aside of perhaps Watford and Leicester it's been against teams who have made us defend

Its a tricky one. The midfield has been a problem so far - too many new players trying to learn to gel in the most pressurised of situations and a team player formations they are not used to.   So it's been a few weeks of trial and error, but with Normann showing his worth in the last two matches, it could be that others will start to show their best too, including Gilmour. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue that Gilmour (and trying to fit him in) has been the main catalyst for our awful start to the season. I doubt very much that we'd have tried to reshape our midfield so radically if we'd have somehow got Skipp for another season. The early experiments with the 4-3-3 saw us totally lose balance with the midfield three trying to be everywhere all at once and totally failing.

Undoubtedly he's a good player. But he doesn't have the positional awareness (yet) to be a reliable workhorse in the engine room (am I mixing my metaphors?) of a team who will be scrapping at the bottom of the table. We need discipline and dogged determination. Our CMs can't get drawn out of position or we'll get torn apart.

I think we could get more out of him if we get him playing alongside Normann and not wandering too far - the role that McLean was playing in the latter part of last season. Starting from a simple position of receiving the ball from the defence and moving it into the midfield and attack would get the most out of his ability on the ball. We just need to stop him getting too far forward so that he doesn't leave a huge space behind to exploit.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I'd argue that Gilmour (and trying to fit him in) has been the main catalyst for our awful start to the season. I doubt very much that we'd have tried to reshape our midfield so radically if we'd have somehow got Skipp for another season. The early experiments with the 4-3-3 saw us totally lose balance with the midfield three trying to be everywhere all at once and totally failing.

Undoubtedly he's a good player. But he doesn't have the positional awareness (yet) to be a reliable workhorse in the engine room (am I mixing my metaphors?) of a team who will be scrapping at the bottom of the table. We need discipline and dogged determination. Our CMs can't get drawn out of position or we'll get torn apart.

I think we could get more out of him if we get him playing alongside Normann and not wandering too far - the role that McLean was playing in the latter part of last season. Starting from a simple position of receiving the ball from the defence and moving it into the midfield and attack would get the most out of his ability on the ball. We just need to stop him getting too far forward so that he doesn't leave a huge space behind to exploit.

I'd agree with all of this, Gilmour is the luxury player we can't afford to accommodate. The EDP journos suggested he might be recalled in Jan if we don't use him but I fear if we do he's too easy to turn over and we lose that ballast in the midfield. A shame but I feel a bit of a poor loan option on our part when we knew we needed more strength / protection of the back 4.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...