Jump to content
Yellow Wal

Billy Gilmour transfer

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Google Bot said:

Limitations at 20? No **** man.  You said there's "Nothing" about him to build around, when he's a player that very much demanded us to build around to get the best from him.  You either bring him in and support him, or don't take him on at all.

What you don't do is stick him in the middle of a 3 man midfield to the point where fans start to crucify him.

Basic football naivety from who. Take your pick. One person or two people

Share this post


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

I'll  take that as a compliment mastoola.

😉 

You just keep backing jen jen.👏

 

 

Both situations are just blind faith  

Athough the later costs me a fortune 😄

Edited by mastoola

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mastoola said:

Both situations are just blind faith  

Athough the later costs me a fortune 😄

Serves you right 😉🤣

Share this post


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

It doesn't take elite players - Just the right ones.

He's someone who glues others with interplay, an example of his movement and ability to work off the ball to quickly move defence to attack:

He isn't someone you throw in midfield and leave overloaded.  Normann can stand out at times in that role because of his physicality, Pukki is vastly experienced in movement but still needs others to stand out, and Hanley... again, physical presence..  And all 3 players in their prime.

Elite players was reference to the fact when he's earnt his plaudits it's been alongside Jorginho, Kovacic, Kante and McTominay who are all Champions League level players. Perhaps an Andrich (as we came close to) would have done the trick. 

But my question was more, if you base the team around Billy how would that make us defensively or offensively better than what we got? Pukki still scored goals, Normann still created, Hanley still defended. Good players will often still look good in bad teams, but to me Gilmour looked like he tried very hard, took the high percentage option in his passing, got abused by anyone over an inch taller and chipped all our set pieces delicately into the keepers arms.

(Cue becoming an absolute wonder at Brighton)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mengo said:

Serves you right 😉🤣

if ever you are in the city on a Thursday night come to the walnut tree shades and watch her do an open mic night.  might be a slight trip from where you are though lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mastoola said:

if ever you are in the city on a Thursday night come to the walnut tree shades and watch her do an open mic night.  might be a slight trip from where you are though lol

If I ever come back to the UK 🇬🇧 from Brazil 🇧🇷,  I will make it  a priority. 👌👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

But my question was more, if you base the team around Billy how would that make us defensively or offensively better than what we got?

If we built the team around Billy then a solid defensive midfielder alongside him would've been number one priority - Otherwise don't bring the guy in to start with.

It's my belief that if we done that, vs bringing in players like Tzolis, Rashica etc. we'd have been MUCH better by default.  To me it seems blatantly obvious, but as I'm needing to explain this - perhaps it isn't?

Edited by Google Bot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

If we built the team around Billy then a solid defensive midfielder alongside him would've been number one priority.

It's my belief that if we done that, vs bringing in players like Tzolis, Rashica etc. we'd have been MUCH better by default.  To me it seems blatantly obvious, but as I'm needing to explain this - perhaps it isn't?

Obvious yes GB. This is what G. Potter has said.

But Potter is confident Gilmour will impress during his time at the Amex Stadium, pointing to his technical ability as an asset.

The Seagulls boss told a press conference, quoted on the club’s Twitter account: “Billy’s an exciting signing for us, he’s an able footballer and a great character, he has a great personality.

“He’ll fit into the group and add competition in midfield. We’re really pleased to have him here.

“As a footballer, Billy’s very technically able. He benefits from structure and the team functioning well, which is our job.

“If we do that, I think he will have a really good time here.”

 

N.B.    1. which is our job

            2. If we do that.

It's the basics surely. Ffs. Structure!

We had none.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Google Bot said:

Just a different opinion, that's all.  Rather than asking if you're on a wind-up yourself I'll choose to respect yours.

But if you did respect my opinion you'd see where I'm coming from, surely? I watched Gilmour 20+ times and genuinely cannot recall a single incident that would give any cause to believe there was a player there and if only he was in the right team/position he'd be quality. I vaguely recall one decent through ball, but that is literally it. So with that in mind, it's difficult to appreciate how/why anyone could conclude otherwise. Hence the request for examples of what a small handful of others saw that the rest of us didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

It seems wee Billy upset Tuchel by refusing to go out on loan again, hence why he was sold according to the BBC football gossip page 

Makes sense, was unlikely to make it at Chelsea, a permanent move is the best thing for him. Going to watch this one with interest, I'm still convinced he's no where near as good as people think he is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This still going on for me it’s simple there are not many players who have failed to shine at Norwich but gone on to bigger things somewhere else. Here is my off the top of my head list 

Harry Kane, Danny Mills, Ade Akinbiyi 

Struggling to think of anymore to be honest I really hope for Gilmour sake he can add himself to that list and last season was an eye opener for him in where he needs to improve.

Share this post


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

This still going on for me it’s simple there are not many players who have failed to shine at Norwich but gone on to bigger things somewhere else. Here is my off the top of my head list 

Harry Kane, Danny Mills, Ade Akinbiyi 

Struggling to think of anymore to be honest I really hope for Gilmour sake he can add himself to that list and last season was an eye opener for him in where he needs to improve.

I think you've spelt wànker wrong. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Google Bot said:

It doesn't take elite players - Just the right ones.

He's someone who glues others with interplay, an example of his movement and ability to work off the ball to quickly move defence to attack:

He isn't someone you throw in midfield and leave overloaded.  Normann can stand out at times in that role because of his physicality, Pukki is vastly experienced in movement but still needs others to stand out, and Hanley... again, physical presence..  And all 3 players in their prime.

Can you remember any other examples of that kind of play?  One good run does not make a player effective. An enthusiastic player, full of energy, but his shooting was woeful, very few examples of the kind of play shown here and I agree with @AJ and don't think he as good as some people think at the top level.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

But if you did respect my opinion you'd see where I'm coming from, surely? I watched Gilmour 20+ times and genuinely cannot recall a single incident that would give any cause to believe there was a player there and if only he was in the right team/position he'd be quality. I vaguely recall one decent through ball, but that is literally it. So with that in mind, it's difficult to appreciate how/why anyone could conclude otherwise. Hence the request for examples of what a small handful of others saw that the rest of us didn't. 

Well, I guess you will see what you want to see.

What I see is a very genuine young man totally dedicated to his trade, who has the touch, balance, awareness, determination, ball skills, vision and good character to continue to develop in his chosen career.

I find it informative that Lampard did not take him to Everton, but Brighton is possibly a better club for him. 

He was treated appallingly by a few City fans, which should be a source of enduring embarrassment for the rest of us. The ongoing obsession with him is simply pathetic.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Pugin said:

He was treated appallingly by a few City fans, which should be a source of enduring embarrassment for the rest of us. The ongoing obsession with him is simply pathetic.

I am not justifying the behaviour of the fans towards him, but you can understand the frustration of the situation - a team doing badly, a player constantly being played and doing very little - a player who is supposed to be "brilliant" and who didn't belong to us anyway, hyped by the media and not making a shred of difference to the team's performances.

Ongoing obsession? More like legitimate interest - to see if he actually can do well in the PL......

Edited by lake district canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

But if you did respect my opinion you'd see where I'm coming from, surely? I watched Gilmour 20+ times and genuinely cannot recall a single incident that would give any cause to believe there was a player there and if only he was in the right team/position he'd be quality.

Yeah I do, that's why I said I respect it.  Many people hold that opinion, I'm just offering a different one, that's all.

And we'll know for sure within the coming months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

Can you remember any other examples of that kind of play?  One good run does not make a player effective.

There were plenty of flashes like that. And you can see his ball control, awareness, work rate and desire is all there.

The problem we had was him being isolated from the front line and overloaded in midfield, we suffered with major lack of movement off the ball.  I mean look at players like PP and Sarge who would sit out wide and run backwards, PP had pace to burn yet wasn't making the moves.

Then take a player like Rashica who just wants to hold the ball himself.  If we had a Nunez, Buendia, Sara - that alone would've benefitted a player like Gilmour no end.  We just had too many individuals running in different directions.

Edited by Google Bot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pugin said:

Well, I guess you will see what you want to see.

What I see is a very genuine young man totally dedicated to his trade, who has the touch, balance, awareness, determination, ball skills, vision and good character to continue to develop in his chosen career.

I find it informative that Lampard did not take him to Everton, but Brighton is possibly a better club for him. 

He was treated appallingly by a few City fans, which should be a source of enduring embarrassment for the rest of us. The ongoing obsession with him is simply pathetic.

 

Whilst I don’t condone how he was treated, I think it may have put peoples backs up when the media were bigging  him up and Chelsea fans were all slating  us for ruining him saying he was too good for us, he may turn out to be a great player who has a top career but I didn’t see enough from him to justify all the praise he was heaped with last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rivvo said:

... the media were bigging  him up and Chelsea fans were all slating  us for ruining him saying he was too good for us, he may turn out to be a great player who has a top career but I didn’t see enough from him to justify all the praise he was heaped with last season.

I can only repeat the advice that Matt Busby gave to Alex Ferguson many, many, many years ago. He said that if you are upset by what appears in the media, don't read it, watch it, or listen to it. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mengo said:

I personally don't think that will happen. 

We showed great naivety in bringing him here with the lack of a defensive midfielder which the majority of fans were screaming out for. Farke and Webber together just completely  showed there true colours on football knowledge in the premier league. Then a  young guy took the flak . Pathetic.

 

You haven’t answered the question. Having said he now has a manger who believes in him, a team which you feel has a style of play that suits him who would be a fault if it doesn’t work out for him? It really is down to BG now so we will see.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Pugin said:

I can only repeat the advice that Matt Busby gave to Alex Ferguson many, many, many years ago. He said that if you are upset by what appears in the media, don't read it, watch it, or listen to it. 🙂

It didn’t upset me at all as I don’t read about Chelsea, but people on here were quoting Chelsea fans moaning and MOTD waxed lyrical over him for no apparent reason. Although I do get your point about the media, click bait rules…..

Edited by Rivvo
  • Thanks 1

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...