Jump to content
Graham Paddons Beard

Billy Gilmour. Out of Favour at Brighton

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, TheDarkKnight said:

Someone just did *points way up*

I don't take it back. It's not specifically Gilmour, it's the type of midfielder he is.

If he progresses and improves, people will know what I mean.

I don't deny a lack of depth. I deny that Gilmour addresses that lack of depth.

As someone else mentioned you consistently move the goalposts. You're orignal quote can be found here...

"Billy Gilmour would walk into the England midfield."

Not 'a player like Billy Gilmour' or 'the type of midfielder Gilmour is' or even 'if Gilmour improves and develops' but specifically Billy Gilmour.

Heck you even said he'd walking into the Man U midfield.

I blame myself, I said I wasn't getting drawn into this again but **** me...

Edited by king canary
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


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

As for the England midfield. I think he would. Same with McGregor.

Pahahahahahahahaha!

You have to be trolling.

I actually agree with the McGregor comment, he's a decent player who would do a job in the Premier League, not sure he'd become a regular in the England squad but he'd definitely be on the radar if he played south of the border and was English. Sadly, he wouldn't get picked if he was English in the SPL, I always felt that Alan Thompson produced his best football at Celtic and could have done a job as a natural left-footer in several England squads during his time at Parkhead, but other than a solitary cap from Sven in a meaningless friendly v Sweden (which he started and by all accounts had a productive first half) he never got a sniff.

But Gilmour?! Even without playing much football, Phillips would get in ahead of Gilmour every single day of every single month of every single year.

And players you would play ahead of him are not in short supply, even if some would have to adapt somewhat to play as a double pivot, you'd put them in ahead of Gilmour;

Jude Bellingham, Olly Skipp, Will Hughes, James Ward-Prowse, Sean Longstaff, Joe Willock, Tom Davies. Every single one of them would get into an England side before Billy Gilmour.

And that's before you look at the prospects, some of whom are similar age to Billy and others are younger, who would get in ahead of him; Harvey Elliot and Curtis Jones and Liverpool for starters. And whilst some of Rico Lewis' appearances for Man City this season have come at full-back, he's a decent CDM as well and has more EPL appearances this season at 18 than Gilmour does.

Edited by canarydan23
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TheDarkKnight said:

That's the thing, though, I watch a lot of LaLiga, and he rarely did that with Real Madrid. His job at Madrid was pretty much just to break up attacks and pass it 5 yards to Kroos and Modric, etc.

Now he's trying to do something he can't do.

Watch him the next time he plays for United. (I think he has about 4 more matches where he's suspended)

His LaLiga average was in the 87% mark. Quite a difference from 78%.

With him and Bruno in the team, no wonder they hardly control possession.

People talk about "passing back and sideways" like it's dirty. It's not. You need players who can keep it simple.

Sure, because you don't need to be creative if Kroos and Modric - two of the foremost creative players of our generation - are in front of you. Not to mention that Real Madrid look to dominate possession so are built for that. Manchester United play far more on the counter attack, so short passes for the sake of short passes aren't how to do that. It means a screening midfielder will probably be encouraged to try some riskier balls out of the deep, especially with the pace United have on the flanks.

Looking at Norwich, we had a defensive passer in Leitner and a very attacking one in Stiepermann. Leitner's passing stats would be far more accurate than Stiepi, but Stiepi often came up with great through-balls for Pukki or something hit into a corner for a full-back steaming on.

Passing percentages don't tell the whole story, basically. Team set-up tells just as much if not more.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, TheDarkKnight said:

Just illustrating the point. 😉

And sure, why not. With the shield of Rice, Gilmour would probably flourish. Phillips and Rice are too similar.

My point Is valid. A question has to be asked why England produce so many attacking midfielders. It would appear that the deep laying playmaker is obsolete in English circles.

Your point is valid....in the wrong thread mate. This ones about BG not getting into matchday squad  at Bton... not English MFs. But anyway , i digress. As my Mum always used to say ...." We'll see". ...Happy to wager a few Bob on BG not playing anywhere higher than he is ( Club footy) in next 3 seasons. ..

Charity bet of course, winnings to Nuttyos  funds ... say €50 ?

Despite Rangers getting semi autos into Europe... playing inPrem counts as higher level than SPL.... again, see Todd Cantwell, no one in prem wanted him....even on a free or small fee , as per Rangers.

Share this post


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

Does it? Winks has played 10 times for the team 19th in Serie A, obviously I'm not watching him week in week out but that doesn't scream 'call me up Gareth!'

Tomori I do agree on though- bizarre that players like Coady get in the squad on a regular basis while he doesn't.

Perhaps the Winks comparison isn't right, I just think there is an advantage to playing in other leagues and the experience that brings, especially in comparison to not being in the Man City team.

Share this post


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

Perhaps the Winks comparison isn't right, I just think there is an advantage to playing in other leagues and the experience that brings, especially in comparison to not being in the Man City team.

Yeah I totally agree.

I've been really pleased to see the recent willingness of young English players to go abroad rather than sit in the reserve teams of big clubs in the Premier League. It has worked wonders for Sancho and Bellingham and we're seeing more doing the same thing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gilmour doesn't need a loan, or a physical midfielder next to him, or a manager who trusts him, or anything else for that matter. The simple fact is that he isn't very good. He's neat and tidy and has good feet but there are hundreds of midfielders like that. He doesn't affect a game, he doesn't break up play, he hasn't got a goal in him, he isn't a setpiece specialist, he doesnt cover much ground, he can't go past people, he hasn't got any pace, he's not good in the air. 

Not good enough for the top level and that's the end of it. He's still better than McLean though.

Edited by Worthy Nigelton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

He's neat and tidy and has good feet but there are hundreds of midfielders like that. He doesn't affect a game, he doesn't break up play, he hasn't got a goal in him, he isn't a setpiece specialist, he doesnt cover much ground, he can't go past people, he hasn't got any pace, he's not good in the air. 

Yeah but apart from that he's good.

I still wouldn't pick him ahead of Kenny either.

Share this post


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

Yeah. I told you that United and Norwich played on different days.

Nah. It's just good to keep an eye on Scots playing abroad, and in England.

Fine. Take out Rice and Phillips, who plays in the deep positions in midfield for England?

Ahead of Billy (if he was English)??? Literally any English midfielder in the top 5 divisions of English football 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

Gilmour doesn't need a loan, or a physical midfielder next to him, or a manager who trusts him, or anything else for that matter. The simple fact is that he isn't very good. He's neat and tidy and has good feet but there are hundreds of midfielders like that. He doesn't affect a game, he doesn't break up play, he hasn't got a goal in him, he isn't a setpiece specialist, he doesnt cover much ground, he can't go past people, he hasn't got any pace, he's not good in the air. 

Not good enough for the top level and that's the end of it. He's still better than McLean though.

Agree with all that, bar the last comment.  McLean is a million times better than Gilmour,  and I speak as someone who has been very critical of McLeans ability (not work rate though)

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/03/2023 at 14:40, TheDarkKnight said:

I'm still adamant that he wouldn't got a quarter of the abuse he got if Norwich actually owned him.

He wouldn't. But that's mainly because he wouldn't have been overhyped as the second coming by the media and Chelsea fans. If he was a Norwich youth player he'd have gone out on loan a bit, played a few games for us and most of us would probably still think he had potential. As it was he came here and we were all told he was amazing and when it turned out he wasnt really up to the premier league it was Norwich's fault

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Agree with all that, bar the last comment.  McLean is a million times better than Gilmour,  and I speak as someone who has been very critical of McLeans ability (not work rate though)

Yeah, I'm in a similar McLean camp. He's a good to very good Championship midfielder but if we are ever in the EPL again and needing him to play 25+ games, like the last two times, then we might as well give up.

But he's still miles better than Billy Gilmour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

Jude Bellingham, Olly Skipp, Will Hughes, James Ward-Prowse, Sean Longstaff, Joe Willock, Tom Davies. Every single one of them would get into an England side before Billy Gilmour.

And that's before you look at the prospects, some of whom are similar age to Billy and others are younger, who would get in ahead of him; Harvey Elliot and Curtis Jones and Liverpool for starters. And whilst some of Rico Lewis' appearances for Man City this season have come at full-back, he's a decent CDM as well and has more EPL appearances this season at 18 than Gilmour does.

I think Tom Davies is utter dogsh*t and belongs in the Championship with Gilmour, but you can replace him with Harrison Reed.

James Gardner (same age as Billy Gilmour) to have a much better career than Gilmour. That will be an interesting one to track. Garner didn't consider him too good to do two years of hard graft in the Championship to learn his trade.

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we're beating Italy 2-0 on Italian soil and our midfield has been pretty good, but just imagine how many we would be winning by if Gilmour was playing for us... 🤓

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I know we're beating Italy 2-0 on Italian soil and our midfield has been pretty good, but just imagine how many we would be winning by if Gilmour was playing for us... 🤓

He was otherwise engaged .....

BREAKING: Longlevens Development 3 Fekenham 3 (Gilmour 2, Rice og).

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

Agree with all that, bar the last comment.  McLean is a million times better than Gilmour,  and I speak as someone who has been very critical of McLeans ability (not work rate though)

He isn't.  One has had three Premier League team moves by the age of 21 and the other has never had a Premier League move at the age of 30.  He also starts for Scotland over McLean.  Ask any manager in the top flight if they had to take one which would it be, and I'm certain 100% of them would take wee Billy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

He isn't.  One has had three Premier League team moves by the age of 21 and the other has never had a Premier League move at the age of 30.  He also starts for Scotland over McLean.  Ask any manager in the top flight if they had to take one which would it be, and I'm certain 100% of them would take wee Billy.

Of course they would because of his age and therefore his potential to improve. As for the here  and now there is no question that McLean is performing the beter of the two, just like he did when they were together in the Prem.

Share this post


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

He isn't.  One has had three Premier League team moves by the age of 21 and the other has never had a Premier League move at the age of 30.  He also starts for Scotland over McLean.  Ask any manager in the top flight if they had to take one which would it be, and I'm certain 100% of them would take wee Billy.

They are very different types of players.  I'm pretty sure the typical reaction from a top flight manager (asked to take either one of them) would be "do I have to ?".


For us, McLean is massively more effective than Gilmour thanks to his physicality, heading ability, and energy.  It's possible Gilmour is better in some aspects of the game, all I can say is that he didn't show anything in the many games he played for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, It's Character Forming said:

They are very different types of players.  I'm pretty sure the typical reaction from a top flight manager (asked to take either one of them) would be "do I have to ?".


For us, McLean is massively more effective than Gilmour thanks to his physicality, heading ability, and energy.  It's possible Gilmour is better in some aspects of the game, all I can say is that he didn't show anything in the many games he played for us.

I agree, I don't think Gilmour is up to much at all as per my post further up.  It's just McLean is more useless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TheDarkKnight said:

De Zerbi: "Gilmour was the best player on the pitch."

Involved in 4 goals yesterday with a 92% pass success rate. Not bad for a player who some think "McLean is a million times better than". 😛

(Still only 21 years old)

Funnily enough, if you watch the highlights all 6 goals come from times where they completely ignore him and pass to other players 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one cares. I’ve no malice against Gilmour, not his fault we signed him, hope he comes good.

Nothing he does now or in the future will change what a massive failure he was for us though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

No one cares. I’ve no malice against Gilmour, not his fault we signed him, hope he comes good.

Nothing he does now or in the future will change what a massive failure he was for us though.

Was Webber's failure though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:
14 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

No one cares. I’ve no malice against Gilmour, not his fault we signed him, hope he comes good.

Nothing he does now or in the future will change what a massive failure he was for us though.

Was Webber's failure though.

Was a strange decision to have him and a lot of people said so sat the time.  On one level a supposedly exciting young player, but on another level, not the strong kind of physical player that the squad was crying out for at that time.  And he's still never scored a goal in his professional career......

Share this post


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

Really? No one? So this thread posted itself? Nice.

Oh please. If a player is playing either inferior players, it isn't there fault. That's like saying James Maddison is awful, as Leicester will probably go down.

Hmm, I don’t have the bile of most on this forum but comparing James Maddison output this season to Gilmour at Norwich is a stretch even for a hyperbolic internet forum.

Gilmour will be judged next year if Brighton cash in on MacAllister and judge Gilmour a worthy successor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the underlying point here is how we seem to fail with our loan signings.

My failing memory recalls peter Crouch as our last successful loan ( I don't count Hucks as we signed him - and how I wish we'd signed Crouch). To see Gilmour catching the eye yesterday does raise the question of "What is going on?" Are we just signing these loanees too early in their career ( see also Harry Kane)?

One Patrick Roberts also salvaged a point for Sunderland yesterday. See also Aaron Ramsey. How long before Marquinhos scores the winning goal for Arsenal at the Champions' League Final?

  • Like 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...