Billy Gilmour

[19QOS19]

No, am I allowed to criticize him if I want? You lot highlight the positive and I'll do the negative then?

It's just bizarre that you're highlighting the negatives of the 4th best player on the park by your own admission. Strange behaviour indeed. No idea why you're so desperate to put the boot in to a young lad tbh.

[lochgellyPAR]

10 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

No, am I allowed to criticize him if I want? You lot highlight the positive and I'll do the negative then?

what is it about the scottish national team and their players that you have a problem with? Has steve clarke hurt you?

[2426255]

8 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

It's just bizarre that you're highlighting the negatives of the 4th best player on the park by your own admission. Strange behaviour indeed. No idea why you're so desperate to put the boot in to a young lad tbh.

It's not bizarre. I never said he was the 4th best player. Not putting the boot in - I have no idea why you're getting such a hard on over a young lad. 

2 minutes ago, lochgellyPAR said:

what is it about the scottish national team and their players that you have a problem with? Has steve clarke hurt you?

You obviously must be new here as I'm firmly behind Steve Carke.

[lochgellyPAR]

11 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

It's not bizarre. I never said he was the 4th best player. Not putting the boot in - I have no idea why you're getting such a hard on over a young lad. 

You obviously must be new here as I'm firmly behind Steve Carke.

I'm not new here but every Scotland thread I'm in, your name keeps popping up and you just seem like a fud with a chip on your shoulder

[2426255]

14 minutes ago, lochgellyPAR said:

I'm not new here but every Scotland thread I'm in, your name keeps popping up and you just seem like a fud with a chip on your shoulder

haha, so if you have already decided based on the community sentiment that I'm a fud then why are you talking to me? Most people wouldn't call into question my standpoint regarding the Scotland National Team or the Steve Clarke. Your post just is inaccurate and makes you look like a fud.  So think before you open that mouth of yours. 

Edited October 12, 2021 by 2426255

[19QOS19]

It's not bizarre. I never said he was the 4th best player. Not putting the boot in - I have no idea why you're getting such a hard on over a young lad. 

You are doing your best to put him down and only managed to name 3 players you thought were better than him which reads to me that you thought he was the 4th best. Unless you care to list some more names.

Of course you're putting the boot in. You've done your best to find fault with the boy's performance even though it was universally agreed that he had another really good game.

You start to make yourself look silly when you make things up as part of your argument. If you can find a single post from the Israel game and on where I've 'got a hard on' for Gilmour then please fire in. Though I'll save you some time and tell you now - you won't find one.

[AJF]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

I thought it was good overall, dependable, he did his part well and worked well within the team structure and brings a unique skillset to the team.  Good performance for his age, not earth shattering - but good midfield to front.

Also if it's fair to mention Billy Gilmour's contribution to the 3rd goal then it's fair to mention his contribution to Israel's second goal and vice versa which were both not direct causes. A balanced thread would be able to show the good and the bad, as it is now it's more pro Billy is world class rubbish. 

Maybe I'm more critical on posts with Gilmour, but it balances out the overwhelmingly positive thread.

This would've been a much more reasonable initial assessment of Gilmour's performance if you led with this rather than simply asking if anyone else noticed  what you deemed to be poor play in the lead up to Israel's second goal. You claim you are offering balance but your initial post contained no balance whatsoever, it just focused on the negative.

[Left Back]

54 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

It's just bizarre that you're highlighting the negatives of the 4th best player on the park by your own admission. Strange behaviour indeed. No idea why you're so desperate to put the boot in to a young lad tbh.

He makes a valid point.  get the useless wee c**t dropped if he's not making the opposition chase him round the park every game.  Get a big hammer thrower in there instead to cement the opposition midfleld.  that'll get us to tournaments.

[AJF]

For what it's worth, I think the 20 minute spell following half time from Gilmour was one of the biggest, if not the main factor in us turning the game around. He was unplayable in that spell.

[Left Back]

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

For what it's worth, I think the 20 minute spell following half time from Gilmour was one of the biggest, if not the main factor in us turning the game around. He was unplayable in that spell.

Did he make any defensive mistakes in that spell?  That's apparently how you judge a player.  Forget controlling the game, moving us up the pitch and orchestrating attacks.  Get focused on the negatives..

[2426255]

26 minutes ago, AJF said:

This would've been a much more reasonable initial assessment of Gilmour's performance if you led with this rather than simply asking if anyone else noticed  what you deemed to be poor play in the lead up to Israel's second goal. You claim you are offering balance but your initial post contained no balance whatsoever, it just focused on the negative.

No chance, I'd still get abuse. 

[2426255]

15 minutes ago, Left Back said:

Did he make any defensive mistakes in that spell?  That's apparently how you judge a player.  Forget controlling the game, moving us up the pitch and orchestrating attacks.  Get focused on the negatives..

You judge a player by looking at the full picture, not just the good. I don't need to look waste time posting the good aspects as you lot already do that loads so I just remind you about the things he's not done well and we arrive at a balanced view of the player.

Edited October 12, 2021 by 2426255

[Left Back]

1 minute ago, 2426255 said:

You judge a player by looking at the full picture, not just the good. 

And overall his performance was excellent and contributed significantly to us winning the game.  Who cares if he made a couple of errors?  He's human and he's young.  It's a rare player that can get through any 90 minutes without making some errors.  If he has the confidence to be brave on the ball, even in defensive situations (and I'd say the same about Patterson as well for the first goal) then let him go with it.  The days of blooter it into row Z big man are long gone.  The best teams do not do that and if we want to improve we have to stop doing it as well.  It might cost us sometimes while we get used to it (i.e. players are offering instead of expecting the ball just to be hoofed into the stands) but the more the mindset changes to recycling the ball and transitioning from defence to attack by retaining possession the better we'll be.

We've all bemoaned for years that our players aren't as technically gifted as players from other countries.  We're finally getting some players that are and also have the composure and reading of the game to put them in the excellent bracket and you want to have a pop at one of them?  I've only ever seen him play for Scotland, haven't seen any other games and he's been nothing short of a revelation.

[2426255]

3 minutes ago, Left Back said:

And overall his performance was excellent and contributed significantly to us winning the game.  Who cares if he made a couple of errors?  He's human and he's young.  It's a rare player that can get through any 90 minutes without making some errors.  If he has the confidence to be brave on the ball, even in defensive situations (and I'd say the same about Patterson as well for the first goal) then let him go with it.  The days of blooter it into row Z big man are long gone.  The best teams do not do that and if we want to improve we have to stop doing it as well.  It might cost us sometimes while we get used to it (i.e. players are offering instead of expecting the ball just to be hoofed into the stands) but the more the mindset changes to recycling the ball and transitioning from defence to attack by retaining possession the better we'll be.

We've all bemoaned for years that our players aren't as technically gifted as players from other countries.  We're finally getting some players that are and also have the composure and reading of the game to put them in the excellent bracket and you want to have a pop at one of them?  I've only ever seen him play for Scotland, haven't seen any other games and he's been nothing short of a revelation.

It's all "who cares if he made a couple of errors" or "he's human and he's young" when it comes to Billy Gilmour making mistakes but when it's oh let's say Stephen O'Donnell he just gets abuse and told he's not good enough. It's not balanced.

[AJF]

27 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

It's all "who cares if he made a couple of errors" or "he's human and he's young" when it comes to Billy Gilmour making mistakes but when it's oh let's say Stephen O'Donnell he just gets abuse and told he's not good enough. It's not balanced.

So are you highlighting Gilmour's errors more because you think it's unfair if another players errors are looked at in further detail?

I'd suggest the reason for that is people are more willing to overlook Gilmour's errors are because they are fewer and he is also a much better player for us, so nobody is going to say he is not good enough when it is abundantly clear that he is.

[Left Back]

19 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

It's all "who cares if he made a couple of errors" or "he's human and he's young" when it comes to Billy Gilmour making mistakes but when it's oh let's say Stephen O'Donnell he just gets abuse and told he's not good enough. It's not balanced.

Firstly that's irrelevant in a thread discussing Billy Gilmour and also irrelevant to you having a pop at Billy Gilmour.  I'll play along though.

Stephen O'Donnell is knocking on 30.  He isn't going to develop as a player.  He is what he is.  He isn't the best right back in the world and any failings in his game are likely not going to be ironed out at his age.  I personally think he's done a respectable enough job for Scotland but I can understand why some people are looking for an upgrade and think he isn't really going to improve us. Is he a top-level right back?  No.  Will he ever become one?  No.  He gets less leeway than Gilmour because he isn't a developing player and we have other options we can try in that position.  Whether Patterson is that upgrade only time will tell.  If you want to construe that as abuse then knock yourself out.

Final point about O'Donnell.  Even if he never played for Scotland again I'm sure people will fondly remember him in years to come for volleying Grealish up in the air.

 

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

48 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

It's all "who cares if he made a couple of errors" or "he's human and he's young" when it comes to Billy Gilmour making mistakes but when it's oh let's say Stephen O'Donnell he just gets abuse and told he's not good enough. It's not balanced.

This is bollocks.  It's manufactured balance where none exists, or need exist.

Billy Gilmour's current ceiling is as high as anyone in the squad, perhaps other than Tierney, Robertson, or McGinn.  His future ceiling is as high as anyone we've had in generations.  Therefore, any perceived mistake/development point is within that context.

The same, or similar mistakes anywhere else obviously has a different context.

Also, Billy is yet to be below an 8/10 for Scotland, and I'm yet to see him falling over his own feet and the ball going out for a throw in.

Edited October 12, 2021 by HuttonDressedAsLahm

[Left Back]

2 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

This is bollocks.  It's manufactured balance where none exists, or need exist.

Billy Gilmour's current ceiling is as high as anyone in the squad, perhaps other than Tierney, Robertson, or McGinn.  His future ceiling is as high as anyone we've had in generations.  Therefore, any perceived mistake/development point is within that context.

The same, or similar mistakes anywhere else obviously has a different context.

Also, Billy is yet to be below an 8/10 for Scotland, and I'm yet to see him falling over his own feet and the ball going out for a throw in.

f**k me.  another one having a pop at him 

[2426255]

So blinkered, you lot just don't want to hear anything bad said about Gilmour even if it's not meant in a bad way. It's all seen as an attack. I never said he played badly I just have pointed out he gets caught out defensively and this is just further evidence towards that.

[2426255]

Consider why Billy Gilmour being limited defensively would affect team selection. If we want Tierney and Robertson attacking down the left how would that work if we had a midfield of McTominay, Gilmour and McGinn for example? When Gilmour plays in the middle or right of midfield he has the freedom to attack and control the game because McTominay or Hendry don't attack in the same way as Tierney and Robertson do. 

To form the midfield without McGregor we would have to switch McTominay to the left or put Gilmour on the left where question marks have to be asked if he could be as good defensively as McGregor. So it's not a point that should be discarded just because you don't want to hear a bad word said about Billy Gilmour.

This forum is full of blinkered, biased idiots.

Edited October 12, 2021 by 2426255