Billy Gilmour

[eez-eh]

Not in the 23-man squad for tomorrow.

Three left-backs, though. Hopefully he tells Tuchel to f**k off in the summer.

[HalfCutNinja]

9 hours ago, eez-eh said:

Not in the 23-man squad for tomorrow.

Three left-backs, though. Hopefully he tells Tuchel to f**k off in the summer.

Ach well maybe Tuchel can tell us how good he looks in training again

[Aufc]

Why do you people get upset when he is not in a squad. He is clearly seen as a back up and, as such, will be pretty limited with his game time. He needs to consider his options and almost certainly go on loan to a smaller epl team to get some game time

[accies1874]

Why do you people get upset when he is not in a squad. He is clearly seen as a back up and, as such, will be pretty limited with his game time. He needs to consider his options and almost certainly go on loan to a smaller epl team to get some game time

For me, it's 50% because I think it will be hindering his development after such an exciting start, 45% because I really enjoy watching him play and it's shite not getting to, and 5% because I'm convinced Thomas Tuchel is gaslighting every single Scotland fan.

[eez-eh]

1 hour ago, Aufc said:

Why do you people get upset when he is not in a squad. He is clearly seen as a back up and, as such, will be pretty limited with his game time. He needs to consider his options and almost certainly go on loan to a smaller epl team to get some game time

It’s just frustrating how much the change in manager has fucked him over in the second half of the season, especially when he was just starting to get going after his injury. Lampard had a lot of faith and trust in him, Tuchel clearly doesn’t.

I don’t think it’s anything personal against him. With the change in manager I think it’s highly likely Chelsea are returning to type, with last season being a huge blip in terms of the number of youth players being given regular chances.

It might be quite demoralising for him though to see a 23 man squad without him, where there’s 3 natural left backs (make that 4 if you include Azpilicueta as cover) for one position, and only 3 centre mids for two positions.

[The Moonster]

20 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

I don’t think it’s anything personal against him. With the change in manager I think it’s highly likely Chelsea are returning to type, with last season being a huge blip in terms of the number of youth players being given regular chances.

I dunno, Mount and James are both Chelsea youth products who don't seem to have any issues getting regular starts. If the players are good enough they'll break into the team. It should be noted that both Mount and James went out on loan at 20 years old and came back fighting for a place, I'm sure folk on here wouldn't say their careers have suffered as a result. Gilmour turns 20 in June, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go on loan then come back in 2022 looking to fight for a first team berth. 

[HuttonDressedAsLahm]

2 hours ago, The Moonster said:

I dunno, Mount and James are both Chelsea youth products who don't seem to have any issues getting regular starts. If the players are good enough they'll break into the team. It should be noted that both Mount and James went out on loan at 20 years old and came back fighting for a place, I'm sure folk on here wouldn't say their careers have suffered as a result. Gilmour turns 20 in June, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go on loan then come back in 2022 looking to fight for a first team berth. 

Being a youth product, and being a youth player aren't the same thing though.  Mount was absolutely a Lampard favourite, and James' appearances have been somewhat inconsistent, but he largely doesn't have a huge amount of competition for his position (it also helps that he is very good).

Gilmour's problem is he is the only youth player in that first team squad.  Sure, there are other young players but they are established and part of the furniture at this point (Callum Hudson-Odoi, Havertz, Mount, James).

Scotland like to wait an age to cap players, well after the point when they were clearly good enough to play for the country (McGregor, McArthur, Armstrong etc. - first caps?).  It strikes as a complete failure to plan for the future - you bring in 17-20-year olds because you expect them to be a mainstay for the future of the national team in the short term, but critically, not in the immediate term.

We seem to only call up players if they are ready to start every game, which absurdly, is very much a rather unique position of ours.

Hickey, Turnbull, and Gilmour are the obvious ones, but there are others.  What on earth would we be losing by having them included in a squad that is quite literally encouraged to be bigger than normal? There was a perfect opportunity when Jack pulled out of the most recent squad, and Clarke opted not to provide cover.  Granted Nisbet was given a debut in the last 20 minutes of the Faroes game, but more could have been done than making McBurnie's record look even worse.

It's difficult because we're preparing for a European Championships, but it's near guaranteed that Considine will finish his career with <5 caps, Fleck <10, Paterson <5 more, McLean <10 more...

That seems harsh, and perhaps it is, and if there was ever a time to provide a manager with a pass, then during Covid and during preparation for a first finals in 21 years, then this would be it. 

Perhaps, we can blood some youth after the EC, and maybe at least we've finished capping players 2-3 times when we all know they aren't any better than what we already have.

Edited April 7, 2021 by HuttonDressedAsLahm

[eez-eh]

2 hours ago, The Moonster said:

I dunno, Mount and James are both Chelsea youth products who don't seem to have any issues getting regular starts. If the players are good enough they'll break into the team. It should be noted that both Mount and James went out on loan at 20 years old and came back fighting for a place, I'm sure folk on here wouldn't say their careers have suffered as a result. Gilmour turns 20 in June, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go on loan then come back in 2022 looking to fight for a first team berth. 

That’s fair. But this season I don’t recall anyone else coming through that hadn’t already made a few appearances last season, even when Lampard was manager (happy to be proven wrong on that if so).

Since Tuchel came in Abraham, another youth product who was liked by Lampard, made a big impact last season and is their top scorer, looks like he’s being pushed out (for pish like Werner no less). I don’t think the signs look great.

[The Moonster]

38 minutes ago, HuttonDressedAsLahm said:

Being a youth product, and being a youth player aren't the same thing though.  Mount was absolutely a Lampard favourite, and James' appearances have been somewhat inconsistent, but he largely doesn't have a huge amount of competition for his position (it also helps that he is very good).

Gilmour's problem is he is the only youth player in that first team squad.  Sure, there are other young players but they are established and part of the furniture at this point (Callum Hudson-Odoi, Havertz, Mount, James).

Scotland like to wait an age to cap players, well after the point when they were clearly good enough to play for the country (McGregor, McArthur, Armstrong etc. - first caps?).  It strikes as a complete failure to plan for the future - you bring in 17-20-year olds because you expect them to be a mainstay for the future of the national team in the short term, but critically, not in the immediate term.

We seem to only call up players if they are ready to start every game, which absurdly, is very much a rather unique position of ours.

Hickey, Turnbull, and Gilmour are the obvious ones, but there are others.  What on earth would we be losing by having them included in a squad that is quite literally encouraged to be bigger than normal? There was a perfect opportunity when Jack pulled out of the most recent squad, and Clarke opted not to provide cover.  Granted Nisbet was given a debut in the last 20 minutes of the Faroes game, but more could have been done than making McBurnie's record look even worse.

It's difficult because we're preparing for a European Championships, but it's near guaranteed that Considine will finish his career with <5 caps, Fleck <10, Paterson <5 more, McLean <10 more...

That seems harsh, and perhaps it is, and if there was ever a time to provide a manager with a pass, then during Covid and during preparation for a first finals in 21 years, then this would be it. 

Perhaps, we can blood some youth after the EC, and maybe at least we've finished capping players 2-3 times when we all know they aren't any better than what we already have.

I totally agree that we shouldn't need to wait around for him starting matches at Chelsea before capping him, I just don't think the situation is so bad that Gilmour needs to leave Chelsea as soon as possible.

[craigkillie]

There hasn't been a single friendly since Clarke took over, so it's hard to bring through players when you're in that situation of basically having to try to win every single game, which usually means putting your best team on the pitch. Even in the two "dead rubbers" at the end of the campaign had the potential to matter if Russia were chucked out for doping as they should have been. That means you have to pick a squad to win the game and are less able to blood players (think back to Danny Wilson coming on against Czech Republic in 2011).

It's a fairly young squad anyway, with not a single outfield player over 30 playing a minute of the last triple header (Considine was the only one in the squad). Callum Paterson who you are writing off above is only 26, for example.

The big issue is that a lot of very highly rated youngsters go absolutely nowhere - we'd have guys like Jack Harper sitting on 10 caps now despite clearly not being very good. Folk point at players from other countries who were capped young and have lots of caps now, but they were usually capped young because they were good rather than being good because they were capped young.

Gilmour is one player I'd make an exception for though, I think he's good enough regardless of his age. If he hadn't blotted his copybook with the red card in the U21s and had played a few more minutes with Chelsea then I think he'd be involved. I'd have him in anyway.

[HalfCutNinja]

I think there's a cause to chuck Gilmour and Patterson in cause they're clearly better than what we have and both going to be top drawer players. They would both improve us so in a lot of respects its a no-brainer.

But it isn't going to happen so what can you do.

[accies1874]

I think there was a benefit to playing with the u21s while he was breaking through at Chelsea in 2019, but sadly that was probably the only feasible time to get him in until those games in March - however by then Clarke had a big group that he trusted, particularly in midfield.

It'll be interesting to see what happens post-Euros when Clarke might feel more comfortable easing out some regular squad members if Gilmour has still barely played for Chelsea.

[Jambomo]

I worry about how much Gilmour is being hyped up. I think he’s a terrific player and think looking at him in the couple of friendlies we have is a good idea.

I think fans are going OTT though. During the WC qualifiers the threads had a lot of people complaining about him being missing and that he was exactly what we need. He’s missed most of the season either through injury or through not being played. I saw him in the cup for Chelsea v Brentford and he wasn’t great. 

He is a great player but we need to stop thinking he’s the answer right now.

[Binos]

16 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

I worry about how much Gilmour is being hyped up. I think he’s a terrific player and think looking at him in the couple of friendlies we have is a good idea.

I think fans are going OTT though. During the WC qualifiers the threads had a lot of people complaining about him being missing and that he was exactly what we need. He’s missed most of the season either through injury or through not being played. I saw him in the cup for Chelsea v Brentford and he wasn’t great. 

He is a great player but we need to stop thinking he’s the answer right now.

Did he not set up a goal that day

[Jambomo]

10 minutes ago, Binos said:

Did he not set up a goal that day

He passed it through to James who crossed it in. It was a good pass, I’m not saying he was awful but he wasn’t great (though to be fair, none of the Chelsea team were and the pitch didn’t help).

Edited April 7, 2021 by Jambomo

[HalfCutNinja]

Two goalkeepers on the bench for Chelsea tonight. Tuchel might as well just say he thinks Gilmour's a c*** and be done with it.

[Old Bing]

Just now, HalfCutNinja said:

Two goalkeepers on the bench for Chelsea tonight. Tuchel might as well just say he thinks Gilmour's a c*** and be done with it.

Yeah that's pretty bad eh.

I think Tuchels out to get us. He will probably buy young Patterson and Hickey. And probably turnbull too. Stick them all in the u16s and retrain them as goalkeepers.

Reckon his wife got pumped buy a Scotsman.

Edited April 7, 2021 by BingMcCrosby

[Fratelli]

I understand that his time will come pretty soon for Scotland, that there's no real need to panic about him not playing every week just now, and also that comparisons with other players from other clubs and countries aren't really worth much etc etc - but seeing Jude Bellingham start (and stand out in)  a Champions League quarter final, with 64 games of senior football and 2 international caps under his belt at 17 - a full 2 years younger than Gilmour, does make me a wee bit apprehensive. Gilmour really hasn't played a lot of football for someone who turns 20 in a couple of months. Then again McTominay hardly kicked a ball for Man United until he was 20/21 and he's turned out OK, but it is a little frustrating that our young prospects often seem to hit a bit of a brick wall after they break through, instead of becoming first team regulars at 18/19 like players from other countries do - suppose this is just due to us not producing many players who are at the level to force themselves into top sides at that age. I probably got carried away and thought Gilmour would be one of those players.

None of this is to do with Steve Clarke picking him or not really (fwiw i'd get him involved pronto) as it's perfectly understandable if Clarke thinks he's not played enough to warrant a call up - but i do think some of the concerns about his progress and future at Chelsea are somewhat valid.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Fratelli

[Aufc]

Bellingham is different thiugh as he made a lot of his appearances at a lower level. If gilmour came througj at birmingham then he would be similar.

I am pretty relaxed about gilmour as the season is almost finished. He does have a choice in the summer though. Shame for him as probably missed the euros now. Hopefully more to come in the future

[Jambomo]

I just think that Gilmour needs to go somewhere next season where he’ll play. I don’t see him getting a chance at Chelsea and he is at the stage where he need to really start playing matches, even if it’s a lower level, so that if what he needs is to prove himself to the likes of Tuchel, then he can do so.